PDA

View Full Version : Massachusetts, I hate you


dug_down_deep
20 Jan 2010, 04:33 AM
But don't feel alone. I am starting to hate pretty much everyone. I hate idiot progressives who thought putting a rockheaded neocon birther in office was a great idea to send a message. I hate the rockheaded birthers who continually fuck everything up and demonstrate a complete lack of all the moral strength they pretend to be proud of. I hate Obama for surrounding himself with people like Rahm Emmanuel and Timothy Geithner, and for selling out to moneyed interests and for either being stupid or disingenuous, which are the only two explanations I can think of for leading off a negotiation with a compromise. I hate Coakley and the Democratic machine for mailing in her campaign. I hate Brown for being a phony rockhead birther so he can collect his graft. I hate Lieberman and all the other conservative dems who chose to advance their careers over the health of the nation. I hate all of them, most of you, and probably myself, a little bit.

Yeah, this is a meltdown. I can't stand the idea that after 8 years of that retard Bush destroying my country, we get 1 year of fading hope before we start sliding off into retard-land again. Fuck.

dug_down_deep
20 Jan 2010, 04:34 AM
I didn't mean it. I love you all.

Nontoxic
20 Jan 2010, 04:54 AM
I miss President George W. He had class, and respect for the office. Clinton was bad enough, let's not forget Carter, but Obama will go down in history as our biggest mistake ever. The democrats won't see a majority for many years to come after this boondoggle. Good riddence.

I love you too

dug_down_deep
20 Jan 2010, 04:54 AM
...morans.

BioBeing
20 Jan 2010, 05:14 AM
I miss President George W. He had class, and respect for the office.

Thanks for the belly laugh! He respected the office about as much as i repect six day old turds.

Obama? Yeah - he's not doing so great. I wish he was a liberal.

DMB
20 Jan 2010, 08:45 AM
I miss President George W. He had class...

Is this a joke? Outside the USA he was either hated or laughed at. He did more than any POTUS in my lifetime (which goes back to FDR) to destroy respect for the USA.

Daydream
20 Jan 2010, 08:52 AM
Go ahead, dug_down_deep. Let it all out. :rolleyes:

Valheru
20 Jan 2010, 11:28 AM
Yep. He shore had class. A class full of kids who know how to hold a picturebook. :rolleyes:

http://www.liveajoke.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/bush-funny.jpg

nygreenguy
20 Jan 2010, 11:44 AM
I still say the liberals should just move. Lets watch what conservatism does to this country. Id love to see them all shoot or inbreed themselves into extinction.

Valheru
20 Jan 2010, 11:49 AM
I still say the liberals should just move. Lets watch what conservatism does to this country. Id love to see them all shoot or inbreed themselves into extinction.

Heh, careful what you wish for. Just take a look at the UK :D

Faerie
20 Jan 2010, 11:59 AM
I still say the liberals should just move. Lets watch what conservatism does to this country. Id love to see them all shoot or inbreed themselves into extinction.

Heh, careful what you wish for. Just take a look at the UK :D

Shit with that, just look at SA. Most liberal constitution in the world and its a major buggerup. Our criminals have more rights than their victims. :dunno:

Valheru
20 Jan 2010, 12:05 PM
Our constitution is something I'm very proud of. It's the fact that the cunts in government can get away with fucking with it, that is the problem.

Matty
20 Jan 2010, 12:53 PM
I still say the liberals should just move. Lets watch what conservatism does to this country. Id love to see them all shoot or inbreed themselves into extinction.

I already offered the cool Yanks to come join Canada and we'll all smoke a doob and watch the fireworks down south. Honestly, when i am king of the world, y'all are sorted.

Valheru
20 Jan 2010, 12:55 PM
I'm seriously thinking of packing up our shit and jumping ship to Canada.

Just don't know how we'll cope with the weather.

dug_down_deep
20 Jan 2010, 02:24 PM
I still say the liberals should just move. Lets watch what conservatism does to this country. Id love to see them all shoot or inbreed themselves into extinction.

I already offered the cool Yanks to come join Canada and we'll all smoke a doob and watch the fireworks down south. Honestly, when i am king of the world, y'all are sorted.
I am so there.

BioBeing
20 Jan 2010, 02:40 PM
Matty for Knig!

:D

dug_down_deep
20 Jan 2010, 02:41 PM
my knigga

Redshirt
20 Jan 2010, 02:42 PM
But don't feel alone. I am starting to hate pretty much everyone. I hate idiot progressives who thought putting a rockheaded neocon birther in office was a great idea to send a message. I hate the rockheaded birthers who continually fuck everything up and demonstrate a complete lack of all the moral strength they pretend to be proud of. I hate Obama for surrounding himself with people like Rahm Emmanuel and Timothy Geithner, and for selling out to moneyed interests and for either being stupid or disingenuous, which are the only two explanations I can think of for leading off a negotiation with a compromise. I hate Coakley and the Democratic machine for mailing in her campaign. I hate Brown for being a phony rockhead birther so he can collect his graft. I hate Lieberman and all the other conservative dems who chose to advance their careers over the health of the nation. I hate all of them, most of you, and probably myself, a little bit.

Yeah, this is a meltdown. I can't stand the idea that after 8 years of that retard Bush destroying my country, we get 1 year of fading hope before we start sliding off into retard-land again. Fuck.

Sorry to hear of the troubles down south. I'm sure as hell glad that I live in Canada. Yeah, Obama is quite a disappointment. For instance, I just can't fathom why he brought in mostly free market fundamentalists into his economic staff -- the people's whose ideology brought the economic crisis in the first place.

The US Senate pretty much made a dog's dinner out of health care reform anyway. The reforms have been hopelessly watered down and probably wouldn't have improved health care affordability much.

The only hope for real change in US health reform is at the state level. I think Pennsylvania has been trying to get some single payer health reform legislation underway.

Berthold
20 Jan 2010, 03:35 PM
I'm seriously thinking of packing up our shit and jumping ship to Canada.

Just don't know how we'll cope with the weather.
Huh (http://www.winesofcanada.com/)?

Ray Moscow
20 Jan 2010, 05:21 PM
I still say the liberals should just move. Lets watch what conservatism does to this country. Id love to see them all shoot or inbreed themselves into extinction.

I'm very glad that I'm about to board a flight to head back to the UK.

DMB
20 Jan 2010, 05:35 PM
I still say the liberals should just move. Lets watch what conservatism does to this country. Id love to see them all shoot or inbreed themselves into extinction.

I'm very glad that I'm about to board a flight to head back to the UK.

What? even with Gordo and Mandelson in charge?

Goodchild
20 Jan 2010, 05:40 PM
There's a possible silver lining in the Mass. loss dug. If the progressives (in the House) arms are twisted and they go ahead and vote in the Senate bill then we're one step closer towards UHC.

I've been paying most of my attention in the bills to the expansion of Medicare. Do you realize that if it passes suddenly millions of Americans are going to be on socialized health care? It's been flying under the radar and skating through but recently came up against an obstacle due to the Nebraska 'sweetheart' deal where they started talking about jettisoning the Medicare provision entirely. No matter what else it does, that bill is going to provide some 10-15 million of our working poor with health care! And now that the Democrats have lost their supermajority they can't go back and strip it out because it would no longer pass the Senate.

So if the health insurance bill is passed we expand the scope of socialized health care in the US by a large margin and it can't be stopped now short of jettisoning the entire bill ... which the administration is not going to let happen.

fwiw, IMO the supermajority was completely wasted on the Democrats. It only made it easier for the conservadems to water it down as much as possible when we could have had a stronger bill (and maybe even a PO) if we had gone the route of reconciliation as the only possible strategy.

I'm actually hopeful to see more good come out of the Congress now that they can't trip over their own feet in a rush to fuck things up. There's no more "60th Senator" to hold bills hostage.

Goodchild
20 Jan 2010, 05:41 PM
I still say the liberals should just move. Lets watch what conservatism does to this country. Id love to see them all shoot or inbreed themselves into extinction.

I already offered the cool Yanks to come join Canada and we'll all smoke a doob and watch the fireworks down south. Honestly, when i am king of the world, y'all are sorted.

If I wasn't poor as fuck I'd have been in Canada long long ago Matty :) Thanks for the offer tho lol. Especially the spliff, I could use one today.

Goodchild
20 Jan 2010, 06:00 PM
Another thing to be glad of Dug, is that since they have to go with the Senate bill or nothing now the Stupak amendment is dead.

Basically, as time goes by they have just watered down further the health bill. Now that watering down stops. There's no more opportunities to fuck it up even more.

dug_down_deep
20 Jan 2010, 06:01 PM
There's a possible silver lining in the Mass. loss dug. If the progressives (in the House) arms are twisted and they go ahead and vote in the Senate bill then we're one step closer towards UHC.

I've been paying most of my attention in the bills to the expansion of Medicare. Do you realize that if it passes suddenly millions of Americans are going to be on socialized health care? It's been flying under the radar and skating through but recently came up against an obstacle due to the Nebraska 'sweetheart' deal where they started talking about jettisoning the Medicare provision entirely. No matter what else it does, that bill is going to provide some 10-15 million of our working poor with health care! And now that the Democrats have lost their supermajority they can't go back and strip it out because it would no longer pass the Senate.

So if the health insurance bill is passed we expand the scope of socialized health care in the US by a large margin and it can't be stopped now short of jettisoning the entire bill ... which the administration is not going to let happen.

fwiw, IMO the supermajority was completely wasted on the Democrats. It only made it easier for the conservadems to water it down as much as possible when we could have had a stronger bill (and maybe even a PO) if we had gone the route of reconciliation as the only possible strategy.

I'm actually hopeful to see more good come out of the Congress now that they can't trip over their own feet in a rush to fuck things up. There's no more "60th Senator" to hold bills hostage.
Yeah, we'll see. It seems like some Dems are already talking about walking away, though. Could the House even pass it, if Dems start bowing out?

Reconciliation would be cool, but I doubt they'll use it. These guys just don't have any balls.

So I'm with you, I hope they'll pass the bill they currently have, just so a foundation will be there, but I don't know if they really will. And if they don't, I imagine we won't hear about health care reform for another 15 years, after everyone I know has suffered under the current system.

Goodchild
20 Jan 2010, 06:08 PM
Reconciliation would be cool, but I doubt they'll use it. These guys just don't have any balls.

Amen lol. Harry Reid is just a terrible Senate leader. Personally, i'm hoping he loses re-election just so that we get someone else in charge, maybe someone with at least one ball ;)

Nontoxic
20 Jan 2010, 10:20 PM
I miss President George W. He had class...

Is this a joke? Outside the USA he was either hated or laughed at. He did more than any POTUS in my lifetime (which goes back to FDR) to destroy respect for the USA.
Bull, he just didn't bow to them, he stood his ground and had a backbone. Now we are being laughed at, even by the terrorists.

miss djax
20 Jan 2010, 11:19 PM
I miss President George W. He had class...

Is this a joke? Outside the USA he was either hated or laughed at. He did more than any POTUS in my lifetime (which goes back to FDR) to destroy respect for the USA.
Bull, he just didn't bow to them, he stood his ground and had a backbone. Now we are being laughed at, even by the terrorists.

uh, you realize this board is populated by people who also live outside of the us? they aren't lying, i witnessed it first hand myself on numerous trips abroad, during clinton's presidency, gw's and obama's.. respect for the us plummeted to all time lows during gw's presidency. its axiomatic at this point.

Valheru
21 Jan 2010, 05:24 AM
I'm seriously thinking of packing up our shit and jumping ship to Canada.

Just don't know how we'll cope with the weather.
Huh (http://www.winesofcanada.com/)?

I've seen snow twice in my life. A 2" layer, that's it. We have sunshine here, on average, eight out of every ten days. When it gets REALLY cold, we have a maximum daily temperature of maybe 10-15 degrees C, dropping down to maybe -2 at night.

Seriously, if you grew up under an African sky, anything else is depressing in the long run. We've now had a spell of rain maybe a week long, and I'm seriously tired of it.

Faerie
21 Jan 2010, 05:36 AM
I'm seriously thinking of packing up our shit and jumping ship to Canada.

Just don't know how we'll cope with the weather.
Huh (http://www.winesofcanada.com/)?

I've seen snow twice in my life. A 2" layer, that's it. We have sunshine here, on average, eight out of every ten days. When it gets REALLY cold, we have a maximum daily temperature of maybe 10-15 degrees C, dropping down to maybe -2 at night.

Seriously, if you grew up under an African sky, anything else is depressing in the long run. We've now had a spell of rain maybe a week long, and I'm seriously tired of it.


I'm coming with. I'm tired of this reslessness in my soul, worried about the safety of my kids, worried about the political unrest in the country, worried about my kids education, worried about the job possibilities in a country that disregard them because of the colour of their skin.

I can live with cold if my soul is at peace.

darjeeling
21 Jan 2010, 06:33 AM
There's a possible silver lining in the Mass. loss dug. If the progressives (in the House) arms are twisted and they go ahead and vote in the Senate bill then we're one step closer towards UHC.

I don't understand how the bill would be a step closer towards UHC. Despite what you wrote about the expansion of Medicare coverage, the rest of the bill only entrenches the insurance system and puts lots of money in the pockets of insurance companies. I don't see that as a step towards UHC. I see it as a strengthening of the status quo.

I've been paying most of my attention in the bills to the expansion of Medicare.

...which is basically one of the very few good things about the bill.

But I wouldn't get my hopes up about it being expanded to everyone. Besides, a good chunk of the uninsured are people who won't be covered by that expansion, and if the bill passes, they'll just be forced to pay for insurance. That's not giving people health care.

dug_down_deep
21 Jan 2010, 01:51 PM
Don't you think the subsidies would cover those people?

Matty
21 Jan 2010, 02:09 PM
We've now had a spell of rain maybe a week long, and I'm seriously tired of it.

FWIW Canada's weather is fucking awesome IYAM. Summer is HOT (though a bit muggy at times) sunny, and very green. The only truly bad things to a transplanted brit are the fucking mozzies


Winter is cold, but mostly dry and bearable. Its also often sunny and very pretty. Plus snow is FUN (if you are a big kid like me anyway)

Its proper seasons, not of that half assed drizzly, cant make your mind up, better put on a raincoat just in case, type shit i grew up with :)

Seriously, if you grew up under an African sky, .
i cant not post this with a lead in like that :)
MB26L8nbRiw

Anne
21 Jan 2010, 02:55 PM
I'm seriously thinking of packing up our shit and jumping ship to Canada.

Just don't know how we'll cope with the weather.
Huh (http://www.winesofcanada.com/)?

I've seen snow twice in my life. A 2" layer, that's it. We have sunshine here, on average, eight out of every ten days. When it gets REALLY cold, we have a maximum daily temperature of maybe 10-15 degrees C, dropping down to maybe -2 at night.

Seriously, if you grew up under an African sky, anything else is depressing in the long run. We've now had a spell of rain maybe a week long, and I'm seriously tired of it.


I'm coming with. I'm tired of this reslessness in my soul, worried about the safety of my kids, worried about the political unrest in the country, worried about my kids education, worried about the job possibilities in a country that disregard them because of the colour of their skin.

I can live with cold if my soul is at peace.

Most Canadians live a few miles of the southern border. It's not that horrible--- just research before you go and find someplace dry and still, not wet and windy.

There's a strange comfort that comes from having real seasons and having snow. It's nice to have the earth mark time with you, and it's nice to have a period of time when it's cold and snowy. And as Matty said, you can play in snow.

If weather is really a terrible thing, the Southern US has got to be more peaceful than SA, from what I've gathered, even if I couldn't live there.

darjeeling
21 Jan 2010, 05:10 PM
Don't you think the subsidies would cover those people?

How much would be people be getting in subsidies? What about the people whose subsidies would only cover a portion of insurance costs?

What about recent college graduates starting their first out-of-college job who are making too much to qualify for subsidies but haven't been around long enough to collect health insurance benefits?

And what kind of health insurance are we talking about? How much is that going to cost and what is it actually going to cover? What about copays, deductibles, etc.?

What drives me nuts about this debate is that people are equating insurance with health care. They're not really the same thing.

The bottom line for me is that it's absolutely insane for the government to mandate that every single person purchase a product from a handful of private companies, with no public option and with no meaningful check on prices (except the market, because I'm sure that'll work...). The bill is primarily a huge nice present with a pretty big bow on top for the insurance industry. Fuck that shit.

DMB
21 Jan 2010, 05:17 PM
I miss President George W. He had class...

Is this a joke? Outside the USA he was either hated or laughed at. He did more than any POTUS in my lifetime (which goes back to FDR) to destroy respect for the USA.
Bull, he just didn't bow to them, he stood his ground and had a backbone. Now we are being laughed at, even by the terrorists.

Do you see my location, NT? I live outside the USA, am non-American and have connections with people in many countries. Have you even been outside the USA?

Nontoxic
21 Jan 2010, 06:09 PM
I miss President George W. He had class...

Is this a joke? Outside the USA he was either hated or laughed at. He did more than any POTUS in my lifetime (which goes back to FDR) to destroy respect for the USA.
Bull, he just didn't bow to them, he stood his ground and had a backbone. Now we are being laughed at, even by the terrorists.

Do you see my location, NT? I live outside the USA, am non-American and have connections with people in many countries. Have you even been outside the USA?
Not past the age of 12, so that would be a no.
It's my understanding that a number of countries, such as France and Britain are going broke because of all the socialist entitlements, thus are leaning more towards western capitalism (not the crony capitalism we have now) while we are going the wrong direction, that being left.
The majority of U.S. citizens, I believe, want power to remain as the Constitution states, with the people. The government should fear us, not us fearing the government. Freedom and liberty for all. That means you are free to fail and be miserable also.

dug_down_deep
21 Jan 2010, 06:09 PM
How much would be people be getting in subsidies? What about the people whose subsidies would only cover a portion of insurance costs?

What about recent college graduates starting their first out-of-college job who are making too much to qualify for subsidies but haven't been around long enough to collect health insurance benefits?

And what kind of health insurance are we talking about? How much is that going to cost and what is it actually going to cover? What about copays, deductibles, etc.?
Hell, I don't know. I can't read that shit. 1000 pages of that stuff. :p

What drives me nuts about this debate is that people are equating insurance with health care. They're not really the same thing.
Yeah, well, Obama tried to label it 'health insurance reform' early on last year, but it didn't stick. I love hearing the teabaggers like Glenn Beck saying they're opposed to 'health care'.

The bottom line for me is that it's absolutely insane for the government to mandate that every single person purchase a product from a handful of private companies, with no public option and with no meaningful check on prices (except the market, because I'm sure that'll work...). The bill is primarily a huge nice present with a pretty big bow on top for the insurance industry. Fuck that shit.
It sucks, but I do think it's better than nothing. Without it, a bunch of people are not going to be covered and will therefore continue to use emergency rooms or avoid going to the doctor and subsequently running up even higher costs and often dying when they don't really have to.

dug_down_deep
21 Jan 2010, 06:11 PM
That means you are free to fail and be miserable also.
Most miserable people haven't failed at anything. You're one of Job's apologists. Only your god is capitalism.

dug_down_deep
21 Jan 2010, 07:34 PM
pP4N09cE4Yw

Nontoxic
21 Jan 2010, 07:36 PM
That means you are free to fail and be miserable also.
Most miserable people haven't failed at anything. You're one of Job's apologists. Only your god is capitalism.

No, not capitalism, freedom and the pursuit of happiness. I revere the Constitution of the United States and don't believe it needs reform, it just needs to be abided by, as it stands, and interpreted as the founders intended.

Nontoxic
21 Jan 2010, 07:43 PM
http://bravenewfilms.org/blog/?p=72427

What a load of bs. We are angry because the democrats aren't listening to the will of the people. Yes, some people voted for Obama for change from the usual political gamesmanship, but what we got is simply more of it. Most people voted for him because of his color, which suggested something to them I'll never understand. Vote for the person, their character, and their priniciples. I could care less what color they are, or what religion.
82% of the people that voted for Brown want the public option? Back it up, if you can. I believe that is an outright lie. We dion't want what the democrats are pushing for healthcare reform - that's the message!

dug_down_deep
21 Jan 2010, 07:44 PM
No, not capitalism, freedom and the pursuit of happiness. I revere the Constitution of the United States and don't believe it needs reform, it just needs to be abided by, as it stands, and interpreted as the founders intended.
I love it more than you do.

dug_down_deep
21 Jan 2010, 07:52 PM
What a load of bs. We are angry because the democrats aren't listening to the will of the people. Yes, some people voted for Obama for change from the usual political gamesmanship, but what we got is simply more of it. Most people voted for him because of his color, which suggested something to them I'll never understand. Vote for the person, their character, and their priniciples. I could care less what color they are, or what religion.
Yeah, that's probably true because you have a hunch it is, right? You're hopeless.

82% of the people that voted for Brown want the public option? Back it up, if you can. I believe that is an outright lie. We dion't want what the democrats are pushing for healthcare reform - that's the message!
http://pol.moveon.org/brownpoll/

It's not people who voted for Brown. It's people who voted for Brown who also voted for Obama. The idiots who voted for McCain are not in this poll.

Nontoxic
21 Jan 2010, 10:14 PM
What a load of bs. We are angry because the democrats aren't listening to the will of the people. Yes, some people voted for Obama for change from the usual political gamesmanship, but what we got is simply more of it. Most people voted for him because of his color, which suggested something to them I'll never understand. Vote for the person, their character, and their priniciples. I could care less what color they are, or what religion.
Yeah, that's probably true because you have a hunch it is, right? You're hopeless.

82% of the people that voted for Brown want the public option? Back it up, if you can. I believe that is an outright lie. We dion't want what the democrats are pushing for healthcare reform - that's the message!
http://pol.moveon.org/brownpoll/

It's not people who voted for Brown. It's people who voted for Brown who also voted for Obama. The idiots who voted for McCain are not in this poll.
I wouldn't believe anything that comes from moveon, first of all. Second, if you say it was only aimed at the Obama voters, I'll give you a pass. Let's move on.

Nontoxic
21 Jan 2010, 10:29 PM
No, not capitalism, freedom and the pursuit of happiness. I revere the Constitution of the United States and don't believe it needs reform, it just needs to be abided by, as it stands, and interpreted as the founders intended.
I love it more than you do. Then fight for it, rather than bale out and move to Canada.
Your response doesn't make sense, you are a progressive, yes? Which means you agree with Obama that the Constitution should say what the government can do to you, or for you, instead of what the gov't cannot do.

Faerie
22 Jan 2010, 05:00 AM
I'm seriously thinking of packing up our shit and jumping ship to Canada.

Just don't know how we'll cope with the weather.
Huh (http://www.winesofcanada.com/)?

I've seen snow twice in my life. A 2" layer, that's it. We have sunshine here, on average, eight out of every ten days. When it gets REALLY cold, we have a maximum daily temperature of maybe 10-15 degrees C, dropping down to maybe -2 at night.

Seriously, if you grew up under an African sky, anything else is depressing in the long run. We've now had a spell of rain maybe a week long, and I'm seriously tired of it.


I'm coming with. I'm tired of this reslessness in my soul, worried about the safety of my kids, worried about the political unrest in the country, worried about my kids education, worried about the job possibilities in a country that disregard them because of the colour of their skin.

I can live with cold if my soul is at peace.

Most Canadians live a few miles of the southern border. It's not that horrible--- just research before you go and find someplace dry and still, not wet and windy.

There's a strange comfort that comes from having real seasons and having snow. It's nice to have the earth mark time with you, and it's nice to have a period of time when it's cold and snowy. And as Matty said, you can play in snow.

If weather is really a terrible thing, the Southern US has got to be more peaceful than SA, from what I've gathered, even if I couldn't live there.

I think we need to start looking at immigration requirements Valheru.

DMB
22 Jan 2010, 07:57 AM
I miss President George W. He had class...

Is this a joke? Outside the USA he was either hated or laughed at. He did more than any POTUS in my lifetime (which goes back to FDR) to destroy respect for the USA.
Bull, he just didn't bow to them, he stood his ground and had a backbone. Now we are being laughed at, even by the terrorists.

Do you see my location, NT? I live outside the USA, am non-American and have connections with people in many countries. Have you even been outside the USA?
Not past the age of 12, so that would be a no.
It's my understanding that a number of countries, such as France and Britain are going broke because of all the socialist entitlements, thus are leaning more towards western capitalism (not the crony capitalism we have now) while we are going the wrong direction, that being left.
The majority of U.S. citizens, I believe, want power to remain as the Constitution states, with the people. The government should fear us, not us fearing the government. Freedom and liberty for all. That means you are free to fail and be miserable also.

How is that an answer to my statement that Bush was either a hate figure or a figure of fun in most parts of the world outside the USA? This is an inept attempt at a derail.

Nontoxic
22 Jan 2010, 08:29 AM
We are a sovereign country, and don't have to ask universal opionion to act in our own best interest. So, if the leftist countries of Europe disagree with our President, that tells me he's doing something right. President Bush took action on Iraq, only after the U.N. proved completely incompetent, as usual, and Sadaam kept giving us the finger, pretending to have WMD's, and not allowing inspections. A man that does nothing is not a leader and not open to criticism.
The media, the left in this country, and some of his own adminstration, were out to take down Bush and humiliate him at every opportunity. They were quite successful in that endeavor. I believe he is a good man, of good character, that did what he believed in his heart was the best course of action for this country. He had many traitors in his midst. What you think of him is irrelevant.
Now we've got a moron in office that is still trying to blame Bush for his continual failings. It is high time he started accepting responsibility for the state of this economy, and the escalating debt. Green jobs, my ass. If other country's love Obama so much, you can have him. He needs to be deported back to Kenya, where he belongs. He wasn't even a good community organizer!

DMB
22 Jan 2010, 09:06 AM
NT, it wasn't just "the leftist Europeans" who thought Bush was a disaster. I simply think you need to re-examine your statement that Bush had class. A President who generates so much hatred and derision round the world is not classy.

You may be able to find all sorts of internal American reasons why on balance he was still a good thing for the USA, but he really lowered any respect foreigners had for your country.

lpetrich
22 Jan 2010, 09:51 AM
I revere the Constitution of the United States and don't believe it needs reform, it just needs to be abided by, as it stands, and interpreted as the founders intended.
How did you determine its writers' original intentions?

We are angry because the democrats aren't listening to the will of the people.
So Real Americans adore the medical-insurance companies and enjoy being denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions?

lpetrich
22 Jan 2010, 10:04 AM
The media, the left in this country, and some of his own adminstration, were out to take down Bush and humiliate him at every opportunity.
How so?

And why do you consider him such a big hero?

Him with his phony Real-American house in Crawford, TX.

dug_down_deep
22 Jan 2010, 02:24 PM
I wouldn't believe anything that comes from moveon, first of all.
So you would lie and ignore evidence because it comes from someone you don't like. I see.

Second, if you say it was only aimed at the Obama voters, I'll give you a pass. Let's move on.
These are the people who decided the last presidential election. There is no moving on. What they think is the only "message" worth knowing, since the retarded Republicans were always going to vote for Scott Brown and any other retarded Republican who ran. And he would have lost, unless the independents voted for him, which they did. And this begins to show why.

dug_down_deep
22 Jan 2010, 02:26 PM
No, not capitalism, freedom and the pursuit of happiness. I revere the Constitution of the United States and don't believe it needs reform, it just needs to be abided by, as it stands, and interpreted as the founders intended.
I love it more than you do. Then fight for it, rather than bale out and move to Canada.
I'm not really moving to Canada.

Your response doesn't make sense, you are a progressive, yes? Which means you agree with Obama that the Constitution should say what the government can do to you, or for you, instead of what the gov't cannot do.
That is not what Obama thinks, and it is not what I think. It is a strawman.

dug_down_deep
22 Jan 2010, 02:31 PM
We are a sovereign country, and don't have to ask universal opionion to act in our own best interest. So, if the leftist countries of Europe disagree with our President, that tells me he's doing something right. President Bush took action on Iraq, only after the U.N. proved completely incompetent, as usual, and Sadaam kept giving us the finger, pretending to have WMD's, and not allowing inspections. A man that does nothing is not a leader and not open to criticism.
Saddam giving us the finger is not really a good reason to go to war.

The media, the left in this country, and some of his own adminstration, were out to take down Bush and humiliate him at every opportunity. They were quite successful in that endeavor. I believe he is a good man, of good character, that did what he believed in his heart was the best course of action for this country. He had many traitors in his midst. What you think of him is irrelevant.
He's a lying scumbag, who authorized torture and invaded a country under false pretenses.

Now we've got a moron in office that is still trying to blame Bush for his continual failings. It is high time he started accepting responsibility for the state of this economy, and the escalating debt. Green jobs, my ass. If other country's love Obama so much, you can have him. He needs to be deported back to Kenya, where he belongs. He wasn't even a good community organizer!
He is not responsible for this economy, you fucking idiot. Do you think that any president can fix an economic collapse rivalled only by the Great Depression within a fucking year? Maybe you can criticize his policies, but you cannot say that the economy we have now is Obama's fault. That's just fucking retarded. Oh wait, you're a birther. Par for the course.

Nontoxic
22 Jan 2010, 04:56 PM
We are a sovereign country, and don't have to ask universal opionion to act in our own best interest. So, if the leftist countries of Europe disagree with our President, that tells me he's doing something right. President Bush took action on Iraq, only after the U.N. proved completely incompetent, as usual, and Sadaam kept giving us the finger, pretending to have WMD's, and not allowing inspections. A man that does nothing is not a leader and not open to criticism.
Saddam giving us the finger is not really a good reason to go to war.

The media, the left in this country, and some of his own adminstration, were out to take down Bush and humiliate him at every opportunity. They were quite successful in that endeavor. I believe he is a good man, of good character, that did what he believed in his heart was the best course of action for this country. He had many traitors in his midst. What you think of him is irrelevant.
He's a lying scumbag, who authorized torture and invaded a country under false pretenses.

Now we've got a moron in office that is still trying to blame Bush for his continual failings. It is high time he started accepting responsibility for the state of this economy, and the escalating debt. Green jobs, my ass. If other country's love Obama so much, you can have him. He needs to be deported back to Kenya, where he belongs. He wasn't even a good community organizer!
He is not responsible for this economy, you fucking idiot. Do you think that any president can fix an economic collapse rivalled only by the Great Depression within a fucking year? Maybe you can criticize his policies, but you cannot say that the economy we have now is Obama's fault. That's just fucking retarded. Oh wait, you're a birther. Par for the course.
At what point does he own it? It's been a year, how many before he accepts responsiblity, hmmm? Bush only signed the first stimulus, and that was under enormous pressure from Pelosi and her henchman, screaming "we're all going to die" if you don't do this. So, yes, he bought it. Obama has tripled down on that game and is still spending, while claiming to be saving us. Most aren't buying his jive talking anymore.
AMERICA BETRAYED BUSH
http://biggovernment.com/2010/01/20/america-betrayed-president-bush/
Except for a June 17 speech in Erie, Pennsylvania in which Bush defended his policies and criticized Obama’s, the former president has been remarkably silent about his successor. He has not fired back at Obama despite the new administration inappropriately blaming Bush for all of their failures.

One year after taking office however, Obama has done a total reversal on his isolationist, non-interventionist foreign policy, and is now pushing President Bush’s neo-conservative philosophy as a justification for starting a new war in Afghanistan. What the Democratic Party once criticized as an over-simplified good vs. evil argument has become the cornerstone of Obama’s reasoning.

“Evil does exist in the world,” Obama recently admitted. “A nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitler’s armies. Negotiations cannot convince al-Qaeda’s leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force is sometimes necessary is not a call to cynicism – it is recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of man.”

In the wake of this stunning adoption of the Bush foreign policy doctrine, there is little, if any dissent. The same people who crucified Bush for liberating Iraq are hardly criticizing Obama for using force to promote democracy in Afghanistan.

Recent Gallup polls find that 62 percent of Americans think Obama’s war in Afghanistan “is the right thing” whereas only 39 percent of Americans think Bush made the right decision by sending troops to Iraq.

Any American who thinks that Bush was misdirected when he sent troops to Iraq in 2003 can’t possibly deny that renewing war in Afghanistan in 2009 to hunt Al Qaeda, eight years after the Sept. 11 attacks is, at the least, equally fallible.

Still, Obama is receiving the kind of public support that an American president, any president, deserves during wartime. Many anti-war activists, journalists and elected officials have been remarkably quiet, affording the new commander in chief the opportunity to launch a successful war campaign.

Very few Americans showed the same faithfulness to President Bush, including members of his own party. Republicans who favored non-interventionism to nation building abandoned Bush, and Democratic senators like John Kerry, John Edwards and Hillary Clinton who voted for the war turned against it before the 2004 elections so they would have the ammunition they needed to criticize their incumbent opponent.

America quickly forgot about how President Bush charismatically lifted our spirits during some of the darkest moments of our nation’s history when the Twin Towers collapsed. After all, even Senator Kerry admitted Bush’s handling of the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks was “terrific,” during the 2004 presidential debates.

But after President Bush successfully secured America in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, he was rewarded with accusations of committing human rights violations and war crimes – an incredible irony since his policies were responsible for liberating tens of millions of people in Afghanistan and Iraq. Some Americans accused Bush of lying and starting a war under false pretenses simply because our troops never found actual weapons of mass destruction.

Despite what Michael Moore implied in his film “Fahrenheit 9/11,” Congress did not base their 2002 authorization for the Iraq War solely on the premise that Saddam Hussein either had or was trying to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Their legislation reads very clearly that America’s purpose in sending troops back to Iraq was to enforce U.N. resolutions, some of which were violated in the 1990’s and probably should have been enforced by President Clinton. Whether actual weapons were found or not, the war in Iraq was legally and morally justifiable, and necessary.

In addition to enduring criticism for his war policies, millions of Americans demanded the new Obama administration prosecute Bush for his decision to indefinitely holding detainees charged with war crimes. When President Obama signed an executive order in May that reinforced that same Bush policy, the far left was mute.

Almost no one said a word. Apparently, its acceptable for Obama to indefinitely hold detainees, just not Bush.

As Obama continues to make decisions that mirror the Bush doctrine, it is becoming apparent that the former president was not ignorant or irrational in his foreign policy decisions despite the harsh criticism and disloyalty he endured. He was in fact, ahead of his time, a visionary who understood politics and warfare in the modern age of terrorism.

That is why Obama is now following his lead.

It should be obvious now, even to Obama’s most passionate supporters that shielding the free world requires more than mere words like “hope” and “change.” Bush’s detractors should be embarrassed having arrogantly thought they could do it better, and those Republicans who abandoned Bush when he needed them most should take a moment to reflect on their fortitude or lack thereof.

Americans who chastised President Bush for removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq should apologize and show him the same respect they are now showing President Obama as he neutralizes the Taliban in Afghanistan.

George W. Bush seemed to have an almost mystical understanding of what the American people needed when we needed it most. He reminded all of us of why we should be proud to be Americans at a time when there was a whisper that we brought the Sept. 11 attacks upon ourselves for promoting democracy abroad.

President Bush deserves our respect, not our betrayal.

dug_down_deep
22 Jan 2010, 05:28 PM
At what point does he own it? It's been a year, how many before he accepts responsiblity, hmmm?
He's not responsible for the economy. He's responsible for doing something about it. He did the stimulus, and bail-outs. He can be judged on both of those. It isn't about time.

Bush only signed the first stimulus, and that was under enormous pressure from Pelosi and her henchman, screaming "we're all going to die" if you don't do this.
Cognitive dissonance. Bush did that because it was the only thing he could see to do. Were you around when Bush did the other stimulus packages? Those don't count, though, and he was probably strong-armed into doing those, too, right? Also...liar.

So, yes, he bought it. Obama has tripled down on that game and is still spending, while claiming to be saving us. Most aren't buying his jive talking anymore.
Racist.

AMERICA BETRAYED BUSH
Oh, we're terribly sorry, sir.

One year after taking office however, Obama has done a total reversal on his isolationist, non-interventionist foreign policy, and is now pushing President Bush’s neo-conservative philosophy as a justification for starting a new war in Afghanistan. What the Democratic Party once criticized as an over-simplified good vs. evil argument has become the cornerstone of Obama’s reasoning.
Bullshit. Bush stopped fighting the war on terror to carry out the Halliburton market expansion project in Iraq. Obama took it back to Afghanistan, where the people who attacked us were hanging out. (But aren't any more, which is why he's making a terrible mistake there now.)

“Evil does exist in the world,” Obama recently admitted. “A nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitler’s armies. Negotiations cannot convince al-Qaeda’s leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force is sometimes necessary is not a call to cynicism – it is recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of man.”

In the wake of this stunning adoption of the Bush foreign policy doctrine, there is little, if any dissent. The same people who crucified Bush for liberating Iraq are hardly criticizing Obama for using force to promote democracy in Afghanistan.
That's a lie. Yes they are. But the criticism is not the same, because Iraq had nothing to do with Al-Qaeda. The comparison itself is complete bullshit.

Recent Gallup polls find that 62 percent of Americans think Obama’s war in Afghanistan “is the right thing” whereas only 39 percent of Americans think Bush made the right decision by sending troops to Iraq.
Wonder why. Durrrrrr...

Any American who thinks that Bush was misdirected when he sent troops to Iraq in 2003 can’t possibly deny that renewing war in Afghanistan in 2009 to hunt Al Qaeda, eight years after the Sept. 11 attacks is, at the least, equally fallible.
Geographically speaking, he's at least a little bit closer.

Still, Obama is receiving the kind of public support that an American president, any president, deserves during wartime. Many anti-war activists, journalists and elected officials have been remarkably quiet, affording the new commander in chief the opportunity to launch a successful war campaign.
Fucking lie. Every progressive media outlet I saw criticized Obama on Afghanistan.

Very few Americans showed the same faithfulness to President Bush, including members of his own party. Republicans who favored non-interventionism to nation building abandoned Bush, and Democratic senators like John Kerry, John Edwards and Hillary Clinton who voted for the war turned against it before the 2004 elections so they would have the ammunition they needed to criticize their incumbent opponent.
Oh, plus they were lied to about WMD. But let's conveniently leave that bit out.

America quickly forgot about how President Bush charismatically lifted our spirits during some of the darkest moments of our nation’s history when the Twin Towers collapsed. After all, even Senator Kerry admitted Bush’s handling of the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks was “terrific,” during the 2004 presidential debates.
Yeah, he acted like the star of a retarded cowboy flick, so he fired up our stupid neurons. The ones that come out when we're drunk or traumatized.

But after President Bush successfully secured America in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, he was rewarded with accusations of committing human rights violations and war crimes – an incredible irony since his policies were responsible for liberating tens of millions of people in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Yeah, ask Iraq about how they like their liberation, retard. Also, this statement is fucking stupid and illogical.

Some Americans accused Bush of lying and starting a war under false pretenses simply because our troops never found actual weapons of mass destruction.
Simply. Jesus fuck. Yeah, just that little thing.

Despite what Michael Moore implied in his film “Fahrenheit 9/11,” Congress did not base their 2002 authorization for the Iraq War solely on the premise that Saddam Hussein either had or was trying to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Their legislation reads very clearly that America’s purpose in sending troops back to Iraq was to enforce U.N. resolutions, some of which were violated in the 1990’s and probably should have been enforced by President Clinton. Whether actual weapons were found or not, the war in Iraq was legally and morally justifiable, and necessary.
What a huge motherfucking lie. What the fuck did Powell go to the UN with "evidence" of WMDs for?

In addition to enduring criticism for his war policies, millions of Americans demanded the new Obama administration prosecute Bush for his decision to indefinitely holding detainees charged with war crimes. When President Obama signed an executive order in May that reinforced that same Bush policy, the far left was mute.
The far left has not been mute at all. The far left has always been opposed to Obama, as just another tool of the moneyed class. The near left has been critical of Obama's continued support for this shit, and have been in favor of trying detainees under due process and not torturing people, which Obama has also been supporting.

Almost no one said a word. Apparently, its acceptable for Obama to indefinitely hold detainees, just not Bush.
No it's not.

As Obama continues to make decisions that mirror the Bush doctrine, it is becoming apparent that the former president was not ignorant or irrational in his foreign policy decisions despite the harsh criticism and disloyalty he endured. He was in fact, ahead of his time, a visionary who understood politics and warfare in the modern age of terrorism.
No, it's been apparent for a long time that he's a demented, corrupt, and retarded little right wing bastard.

That is why Obama is now following his lead.
Inasmuch as this is true, it is the source of Obama's political weakness at the moment.

It should be obvious now, even to Obama’s most passionate supporters that shielding the free world requires more than mere words like “hope” and “change.” Bush’s detractors should be embarrassed having arrogantly thought they could do it better, and those Republicans who abandoned Bush when he needed them most should take a moment to reflect on their fortitude or lack thereof.

Americans who chastised President Bush for removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq should apologize and show him the same respect they are now showing President Obama as he neutralizes the Taliban in Afghanistan.

George W. Bush seemed to have an almost mystical understanding of what the American people needed when we needed it most. He reminded all of us of why we should be proud to be Americans at a time when there was a whisper that we brought the Sept. 11 attacks upon ourselves for promoting democracy abroad.

President Bush deserves our respect, not our betrayal.
Fuck off, you idiots.

Nontoxic
22 Jan 2010, 06:10 PM
At what point does he own it? It's been a year, how many before he accepts responsiblity, hmmm?
He's not responsible for the economy. He's responsible for doing something about it. He did the stimulus, and bail-outs. He can be judged on both of those. It isn't about time.

Bush only signed the first stimulus, and that was under enormous pressure from Pelosi and her henchman, screaming "we're all going to die" if you don't do this.
Cognitive dissonance. Bush did that because it was the only thing he could see to do. Were you around when Bush did the other stimulus packages? Those don't count, though, and he was probably strong-armed into doing those, too, right? Also...liar.

So, yes, he bought it. Obama has tripled down on that game and is still spending, while claiming to be saving us. Most aren't buying his jive talking anymore.
Racist.

AMERICA BETRAYED BUSH
Oh, we're terribly sorry, sir.

One year after taking office however, Obama has done a total reversal on his isolationist, non-interventionist foreign policy, and is now pushing President Bush’s neo-conservative philosophy as a justification for starting a new war in Afghanistan. What the Democratic Party once criticized as an over-simplified good vs. evil argument has become the cornerstone of Obama’s reasoning.
Bullshit. Bush stopped fighting the war on terror to carry out the Halliburton market expansion project in Iraq. Obama took it back to Afghanistan, where the people who attacked us were hanging out. (But aren't any more, which is why he's making a terrible mistake there now.)

Who says the terrorists that want to kill us aren't there anymore? That's utterly absurd. If that were true, then bring the troops home now.

“Evil does exist in the world,” Obama recently admitted. “A nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitler’s armies. Negotiations cannot convince al-Qaeda’s leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force is sometimes necessary is not a call to cynicism – it is recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of man.”

In the wake of this stunning adoption of the Bush foreign policy doctrine, there is little, if any dissent. The same people who crucified Bush for liberating Iraq are hardly criticizing Obama for using force to promote democracy in Afghanistan.
That's a lie. Yes they are. But the criticism is not the same, because Iraq had nothing to do with Al-Qaeda. The comparison itself is complete bullshit.

Not at all. Let's not forget that these wars are funded by the liberal Congress, yet remain undeclared - why is that?
We fight them there, or we fight them here on our soil. I support the effort, but only if we can define what a "win" looks like.

Recent Gallup polls find that 62 percent of Americans think Obama’s war in Afghanistan “is the right thing” whereas only 39 percent of Americans think Bush made the right decision by sending troops to Iraq.
Wonder why. Durrrrrr...


Geographically speaking, he's at least a little bit closer.


Fucking lie. Every progressive media outlet I saw criticized Obama on Afghanistan.
Not even close. They aren't calling him a monkey, an idiot, hanging him in effigy, drawing mustaches on his photo's, or marching in protest. Get real. When Rachel Maddox and Oberweiner start criticizing Obama, then you might be onto something.


Oh, plus they were lied to about WMD. But let's conveniently leave that bit out.


Yeah, he acted like the star of a retarded cowboy flick, so he fired up our stupid neurons. The ones that come out when we're drunk or traumatized.


Yeah, ask Iraq about how they like their liberation, retard. Also, this statement is fucking stupid and illogical.
Remember the purple fingers? Their election went smoother than ours, and was more legitimate. They are liberated, and happy about it. Children are back in school, women are going to college, shops are open for business etc.


Some Americans accused Bush of lying and starting a war under false pretenses simply because our troops never found actual weapons of mass destruction.
Simply. Jesus fuck. Yeah, just that little thing.
They fooled us, they fooled the rest of the world, even Powell and Clinton. He used bio-weapons against his own people, so they were there. They are probably buried in Syria now, who knows. What's done is done, now it's Obama's war, and he's a pitiful commander in chief.

Despite what Michael Moore implied in his film “Fahrenheit 9/11,” Congress did not base their 2002 authorization for the Iraq War solely on the premise that Saddam Hussein either had or was trying to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Their legislation reads very clearly that America’s purpose in sending troops back to Iraq was to enforce U.N. resolutions, some of which were violated in the 1990’s and probably should have been enforced by President Clinton. Whether actual weapons were found or not, the war in Iraq was legally and morally justifiable, and necessary.
What a huge motherfucking lie. What the fuck did Powell go to the UN with "evidence" of WMDs for?
Have you read the legislationi? Then STFU

In addition to enduring criticism for his war policies, millions of Americans demanded the new Obama administration prosecute Bush for his decision to indefinitely holding detainees charged with war crimes. When President Obama signed an executive order in May that reinforced that same Bush policy, the far left was mute.
The far left has not been mute at all. The far left has always been opposed to Obama, as just another tool of the moneyed class. The near left has been critical of Obama's continued support for this shit, and have been in favor of trying detainees under due process and not torturing people, which Obama has also been supporting.
Waterboarding 3 people is not torture, and was not policy. It was reserved for the worst of the worst, when all other methods failed. It was even used on our own troops, so they would experience it. We don't torture our own. Now we are sitting ducks, waiting for the next attack.

Almost no one said a word. Apparently, its acceptable for Obama to indefinitely hold detainees, just not Bush.
No it's not.

As Obama continues to make decisions that mirror the Bush doctrine, it is becoming apparent that the former president was not ignorant or irrational in his foreign policy decisions despite the harsh criticism and disloyalty he endured. He was in fact, ahead of his time, a visionary who understood politics and warfare in the modern age of terrorism.
No, it's been apparent for a long time that he's a demented, corrupt, and retarded little right wing bastard.

That is why Obama is now following his lead.
Inasmuch as this is true, it is the source of Obama's political weakness at the moment.

It should be obvious now, even to Obama’s most passionate supporters that shielding the free world requires more than mere words like “hope” and “change.” Bush’s detractors should be embarrassed having arrogantly thought they could do it better, and those Republicans who abandoned Bush when he needed them most should take a moment to reflect on their fortitude or lack thereof.

Americans who chastised President Bush for removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq should apologize and show him the same respect they are now showing President Obama as he neutralizes the Taliban in Afghanistan.

George W. Bush seemed to have an almost mystical understanding of what the American people needed when we needed it most. He reminded all of us of why we should be proud to be Americans at a time when there was a whisper that we brought the Sept. 11 attacks upon ourselves for promoting democracy abroad.

President Bush deserves our respect, not our betrayal.
Fuck off, you idiots.

You say Obama is not responsible for the economy? Unbelievable! He sure as hell is. Here's the debt of Bush compared to Obama's in pictures, that even you should be able to grasp.
What’s driving Obama’s unprecedented massive deficits? Spending. Riedl details:

•President Bush expanded the federal budget by a historic $700 billion through 2008. President Obama would add another $1 trillion.
•President Bush began a string of expensive finan*cial bailouts. President Obama is accelerating that course.
•President Bush created a Medicare drug entitle*ment that will cost an estimated $800 billion in its first decade. President Obama has proposed a $634 billion down payment on a new govern*ment health care fund.
•President Bush increased federal education spending 58 percent faster than inflation. Presi*dent Obama would double it.
•President Bush became the first President to spend 3 percent of GDP on federal antipoverty programs. President Obama has already in*creased this spending by 20 percent.
•President Bush tilted the income tax burden more toward upper-income taxpayers. President Obama would continue that trend.

•President Bush presided over a $2.5 trillion increase in the public debt through 2008. Setting aside 2009 (for which Presidents Bush and Obama share responsibility for an additional $2.6 trillion in public debt), President Obama’s budget would add $4.9 trillion in public debt from the beginning of 2010 through 2016.
UPDATE: Many Obama defenders in the comments are claiming that the numbers above do not include spending on Iraq and Afghanistan during the Bush years. They most certainly do. While Bush did fund the wars through emergency supplementals (not the regular budget process), that spending did not simply vanish. It is included in the numbers above. Also, some Obama defenders are claiming the graphic above represents biased Heritage Foundation numbers. While we stand behind the numbers we put out 100%, the numbers, and the graphic itself, above are from the Washington Post. We originally left out the link to WaPo. It has been now been added.

CLARIFICATION: Of course, this Washington Post graphic does not perfectly delineate budget surpluses and deficits by administration. President Bush took office in January 2001, and therefore played a lead role in crafting the FY 2002-2008 budgets. Presidents Bush and Obama share responsibility for the FY 2009 budget deficit that overlaps their administrations, before President Obama assumes full budgetary responsibility beginning in FY 2010. Overall, President Obama’s budget would add twice as much debt as President Bush over the same number of years.

http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bush-deficit-vs-obama-deficit-in-pictures/

dug_down_deep
22 Jan 2010, 06:35 PM
Who says the terrorists that want to kill us aren't there anymore? That's utterly absurd. If that were true, then bring the troops home now.
General McChrystal says that Al-Qaeda has a 'scant' presence. I don't care about people wanting to kill us. We don't attack people for wanting to kill us. That's fucking insane.

“I do not see indications of a large al-Qaeda presence in Afghanistan now. We do see al-Qaeda presence from time to time. We do see a clear relationship between al-Qaeda and parts of the insurgents, particularly the Haqqani network But we also see linkages with the Taliban as well."

dug_down_deep
22 Jan 2010, 06:38 PM
Not even close. They aren't calling him a monkey, an idiot, hanging him in effigy, drawing mustaches on his photo's, or marching in protest. Get real. When Rachel Maddox and Oberweiner start criticizing Obama, then you might be onto something.
Who the fuck are you talking about? Maddow and Olbermann have both criticized the president. Who the fuck in the media was doing the shit you listed?

munnki
23 Jan 2010, 07:28 AM
You guys need to get naked and hit a sweat lodge together.

Barleyman
23 Jan 2010, 07:34 AM
Bush was retarded, that's for sure.

DMB
23 Jan 2010, 10:47 PM
Fighting and insults between Nontoxic and dug_down_deep moved to Smoking Section (http://www.secularcafe.org/showthread.php?t=4997). Please try to express differing opinions without chucking personal insults around, guys.

dug_down_deep
24 Jan 2010, 04:00 PM
That link doesn't work.

DMB
24 Jan 2010, 05:29 PM
Sorry. Link is now fixed.